The Sheltie went home! (rescue v. owner saga)

[vacation1]

A Shetland Sheepdog, Piper, got lost on Easter weekend 2014, and was picked up, taken to a public shelter. The holiday weekend screwed up the search, and (very long story short) the dog ended up being given to a local Sheltie rescue on Monday morning. The owner contacted the rescue, proved the dog was hers - and the rescue refused to return the dog.

The AKC people are convinced it was breeder-hate. Others think the rescue’s operator - it’s basically a one-woman show - is a malicious psycho. And others seemed to have gotten emotionally stuck at the playground ‘finders keepers’ level of morality (ok, my POV is kinda showing). In any event, the breeder/owners sued to get the dog back. Today, the judge listened to their side, got so annoyed at the rescue he refused to even hear their lawyer :lol:, and ruled to give the dog back to the breeder/owner pending trial.

An amazing story, if only because this dog happens to be so well documented (AKC pedigree, zillions of photos, microchip). There is zero doubt the dog belonged to the breeder/owner. The apparent malice shown to the owner by the rescue is just amazing. This was a bad, bad story with a happy ending.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/07/24/punxsutawney-piper.html

http://www.bestinshowdaily.com/blog/ohio-judge-rules-piper-returned-to-owners/

[Casey09]

This is such a bizarre story. I can’t believe it took so long given the microchip.

[Countrywood]

It’s nuts the rescue did not want to give the dog back. What else were we supposed to say? surely it is an extreme case and not the norm.

[Countrywood]

This post focused on how crazy the rescue acted with owner. BUT if fails to analyze the positive role the rule the rescue played. The dog after getting lost was picked up, taken to a public shelter. Many public shelters if dog is not claimed/adopted in a short window of time euthanize adult dogs.

Even though the rescue owner acted crazy about giving him back, they were there to take in the dog and as a breed specific rescue were a place the owner could locate the dog.

The fact that later the rescue person acted crazy is unfortunate, but overall the dog was saved by the rescue and able to be located there. The actions of the rescue director were extreme of course. But without the rescue the dog might not be alive…county shelters can euthanize within a week or less if over crowded.

[thatmoody]

I’m bothered by the shelter only giving 3 days to locate the owner. Ours gives 5, and I know that they DO try very hard to reunite owners. In addition to researching the microchip information, they also have a website of their own, and we have a county website and info is posted on the dogs (with clear pictures) on the local lost pets FB page.

What REALLY bothers me is that they didn’t account for the holiday, and that they were so eager to rehome what was obviously a very nice dog (have seen this before - those dogs are high demand and help a rescue get their “adopted numbers” up, so there may be some shenanigans going on here).

[Countrywood]

what shenanigans can go on between a rescue and a shelter…rescues have to get their numbers up for the millions they receive in funds? (sarcasm intended) . Some rescues have an arrangement with shelters that if a dog with potential for adoption or a breed specific dog is up for euthanasia, the shelter can call the rescue first. Do some believe the better outcome would be if this did not happen and the dogs went straight to euthanasia?

This is an extreme case , weird of course. Rescues return lost dogs to their owners who track the dog down but of course the normal return to an owner won’t make the news.

Far more common are purebred owners who neglect leading to confiscation or give up their aging, pure breed dogs (the breed rescues are full of aged dogs whose owners AVOID reclaiming them) But that does not make a funny, bash worthy story and is absent from media attention.

[thatmoody]

Our shelter doesn’t DO the whole straight to euthanasia, so that’s kind of a moot point. I’m sorry the one in your area does, but many do not.

And I won’t argue about breeders responsibility, I’m just saying that rescues would rather pull THESE types of dogs than less adoptable ones - they often leave those to languish in the shelter, meanwhile touting THEIR success stories for funding, because they can be more selective in their intake.

[thatmoody]

And I’m not knocking the rescues too much - they do an awesome job of temperament evaluation and matching (at least most of the ones in our area seem to with a few notable exceptions). But I’m just saying not all shelters are horrid pits of dead animals - our shelter is pretty good too - it’s run by the sheriff’s office, is minimal euthanization (only in bite/agression cases and serious illness), they have a vet on staff as well as a rudimentary clinic for on-site treatment, and provide training in animal behavior, etc. to employees. There are still some issues there, but they are relatively minor and have more to do with bureaucracy than with policies.

[Countrywood]

Yes breed rescues pull the breed ( that’s why they are a breed rescue), and rescues tend to take on the more adoptable dogs. But even those have a hard time finding homes for the dogs. Not all county shelters are horrible but they vary and many become crowded and start euthanizing after a month or however long they can hold on to an animal for.

The rescue I adopted my dog from takes on nice temperament dogs that were in county shelters whose 30 days were up and were slated to be euthanized. Mine is a very pretty golden retriever mix with some minor health issues but his age (7) and the issues made him hard to adopt. Most dogs the rescue take on are younger ( 1 year to 5 years ) but many are pit breed mixes so even though lovely temperaments ( identified by shelter workers as good tempered), it takes the rescue months to a year to find homes for them. They can only take on a limited amount due to lack of funding, lack of foster homes; run on a shoestring of donations with all volunteers.

[Countrywood]

And I won’t argue about breeders responsibility, I’m just saying that rescues would rather pull THESE types of dogs than less adoptable ones - they often leave those to languish in the shelter, meanwhile touting THEIR success stories for funding, because they can be more selective in their intake.

So what is your view…they should take less adoptable dogs, not be able to find homes for those dogs and lose their funding?

[thatmoody]

Well, that’s essentially what they’re asking the shelter to do, thus creating a situation where the shelter could potentially end up with all of the “difficult” dogs and an artificially skewed adoption rate because of it, while the rescues come out smelling like roses. It’s just something I’ve noticed, and thought may have contributed to this situation. I am not saying (well, I guess I kind of am) that it’s a problem, because it may not be - it’s just something I’ve noticed when our local rescues are coming on FB and touting their great adoption statistics. I wouldn’t say DON’T do it, but when you’re comparing rescues to shelters, it’s something that should be taken into consideration, is all.

[Countrywood]

From what I can tell of the breed rescues ( at one point I was looking to adopt a pure bred ) they take on a mix of dogs many who are hard to adopt or not adoptable (imo)…such as older dogs who also have health issues. The younger easier to adopt out dogs the adoption fees go to care for the others who might take a long time to adopt/never find a home. Should a rescue be taking on older dos with such low chance of adoption…I don’t have the answer to that. But virtually every breed rescue site I looked at had a shortage of young dogs and a lot of seniors.

[caper]

I am so glad they are reunited! That is just a crazy and unbelievable story. I’d be high tailin it to PA too!

[Countrywood]

I think people are aware of that fact (that rescues tend to take on dogs with a better chance of finding homes) . Yet you offer no solution so what is the point of harping on it. And consider the fact that many of the dogs that the rescues take on get the better chance of a home because of the work the rescues put into the animals…socialization, grooming, addressing health issues, advertising and community outreach . A number of the dogs rescues take on had been at the shelter awhile with no takers. Many dogs, even “nice ones” get traumatized and shut down at shelters or constantly bark, making them difficult to attract people.

All these problems including the problems with certain rescues are the outcome of a lousy reality of over breeding, lack of enforcement of the laws that do exist, irresponsible owners, etc.

[thatmoody]

Yeah, I dunno why I felt the need to bring it up - I had been thinking about it lately as I was writing a grant.

[Countrywood]

It’s okay you bought it up, I just notice a distinct trend of rescue bashing on the board which imo is sad. The real problem is why there are so many dogs who end up in rescue or shelter in the first place ; the rescue bashing takes the focus away from the real problem.

[Countrywood]

A reason many people go to rescues to adopt instead of a shelter is the people can’t stand the thought of going to a shelter, picking one dog out of the hundreds and leaving the rest behind, knowing some of those left behind will be euthanized.

At a rescue they can pick out one dog and not feel they denied a chance of life by picking the one they did instead of the one with sad eyes in the neighboring cage. That is the very reason I adopt from rescues (both rescues I adopted from take on dogs from high kill shelters to give them a better chance at finding homes.)

[Mosey_2003]

The real problem is this lunatic held a dog hostage who had an owner who wanted it back.

[PAF]

I would like to put in a rescue viewpoint on this. First, we are a breed rescue in an area of the country where dogs are not valued as family members and the spay/neuter rates are very low.

As a breed rescue, we only pull our breed from the animal control facilities. We specifically pull from two high kill county facilities and we pull ALL of the breed that we rescue, no matter what their age or health status. The public has the first crack at any of the dogs in the shelter and we are back up to them.

Needless to say, we wind up with many that have health issues, are very old, etc. Still we pull them and get them well if we can and find a home for them if we can. Those who are not adoptable stay in permanent foster homes for the remainder of their lives. We get no public funding. We survive (and just barely) on donations and the kindness of the vet we use and our foster homes.

I have followed this particular case and as I recall it, the shelter didn’t actually follow their own “stray hold” period, they turned the dog over to the rescue too early. If the animal control facility had held onto the dog the proper amount of time, the owner would have found him there. Instead they released the dog early (could never determine if intentional or by mistake) and the rescue refused to return the dog to the owner when he contacted them (which happened just after they took the dog in). Given all the facts, no reputable rescue would have refused to return the dog to the owner. There was no doubt what happened and no excuse for her to refuse. We should all be so lucky to have owners that care about their dogs.

The facilities we pull from are nothing more than warehouses for the dogs until it is time to euthanize them. There is not enough tax money spent to really rehabilitate each dog and do a proper job of placing them. We pull them, access their health, emotional and training needs and take care of them. We carefully screen their potential adopters so that it can be a permanent happy placement and we remain as a back up to them for the remainder of the dog’s life. We take them back for any reason at any time. The average dog that comes through here gets spay/neuter, microchip, dental, mass removal. Our adoption fees NEVER cover the cost of the vet care they get before they are placed.

There are nuts in the rescue world just like there are nuts in every other part of the population. No one should paint all rescues with the same broad brush just like breeders, owners, etc. We work hard and long hours trying to do good in the world. It is hurtful and contributes to the high burnout rate when we are attacked by people that don’t walk in our shoes. It is not our fault that there are so many dogs in need. We are just trying to clean up other people’s messes and take care of the responsibilities that they have shunned.

[LauraKY]

[QUOTE=PAF;8243835]
I would like to put in a rescue viewpoint on this. First, we are a breed rescue in an area of the country where dogs are not valued as family members and the spay/neuter rates are very low.

As a breed rescue, we only pull our breed from the animal control facilities. We specifically pull from two high kill county facilities and we pull ALL of the breed that we rescue, no matter what their age or health status. The public has the first crack at any of the dogs in the shelter and we are back up to them.

Needless to say, we wind up with many that have health issues, are very old, etc. Still we pull them and get them well if we can and find a home for them if we can. Those who are not adoptable stay in permanent foster homes for the remainder of their lives. We get no public funding. We survive (and just barely) on donations and the kindness of the vet we use and our foster homes.

I have followed this particular case and as I recall it, the shelter didn’t actually follow their own “stray hold” period, they turned the dog over to the rescue too early. If the animal control facility had held onto the dog the proper amount of time, the owner would have found him there. Instead they released the dog early (could never determine if intentional or by mistake) and the rescue refused to return the dog to the owner when he contacted them (which happened just after they took the dog in). Given all the facts, no reputable rescue would have refused to return the dog to the owner. There was no doubt what happened and no excuse for her to refuse. We should all be so lucky to have owners that care about their dogs.

The facilities we pull from are nothing more than warehouses for the dogs until it is time to euthanize them. There is not enough tax money spent to really rehabilitate each dog and do a proper job of placing them. We pull them, access their health, emotional and training needs and take care of them. We carefully screen their potential adopters so that it can be a permanent happy placement and we remain as a back up to them for the remainder of the dog’s life. We take them back for any reason at any time. The average dog that comes through here gets spay/neuter, microchip, dental, mass removal. Our adoption fees NEVER cover the cost of the vet care they get before they are placed.

There are nuts in the rescue world just like there are nuts in every other part of the population. No one should paint all rescues with the same broad brush just like breeders, owners, etc. We work hard and long hours trying to do good in the world. It is hurtful and contributes to the high burnout rate when we are attacked by people that don’t walk in our shoes. It is not our fault that there are so many dogs in need. We are just trying to clean up other people’s messes and take care of the responsibilities that they have shunned.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. This is how most breed rescues work. The ones I work with also pull mixes…but have to be careful because they are more difficult to rehome. It really works out better for the dogs too; if someone goes to a breed rescue to adopt, they’re usually familiar with the traits of the breed and won’t be horrified when, for instance, their collie tries to herd their children.